I feel sick

Endurance Man

Well i just watched (tried to) a horrible video showing the cruelty that occurs at one of many animal testing labs around the world, i feel sick to my stomach .

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-509032547329539187&q=covance

I had to stop this video half way through, be warned .
Are there any supporters of animal testing now :mad: ?

LundiMardi

turned it off after about 5 seconds:(

monkeyfudge

Now don't get me wrong. I like monkeys as much as the next man...

But what alternative to animal testing can you suggest? Should we just give up on developing new drugs and treatments?

Heyes

I cant even bring myself to look at it

RuggieBear

thanks to those animals, we don't have videos of children and adults suffering horrible, slow and painful deaths...

Endurance Man

monkeyfudge wrote:

Now don't get me wrong. I like monkeys as much as the next man...

But what alternative to animal testing can you suggest? Should we just give up on developing new drugs and treatments?

TBH -YES
It is not the animal worlds fault that man has destroyed its world and in the process created a number of *new* diseases and problems that we are now susceptible to.
Oh, and if you think that its just drug testing, take a look at this list of companys who use animal testing :mad: :

http://www.caringconsumer.com/page/companiesDoTest.doc

Man tries to play god at the expense of these animals!

daRobot

Endurance Man wrote:

TBH -YES
It is not the animal worlds fault that man has destroyed its world and in the process created a number of *new* diseases and problems that we are now susceptible to.
Oh, and if you think that its just drug testing, take a look at this list of companys who use animal testing :mad: :

http://www.caringconsumer.com/page/companiesDoTest.doc

Man tries to play god at the expense of these animals!

Animals before people?

You're an idiot

fade2black

Have a read of this and see what you think.

(BTW, notice the ironic Tom Petty tune in the background)

Fajitas!

I'm with Monkeyfudge on this one.

Wierd though. Noone really bothers putting up videos of what they inject rats and mice with, but chickens and monkeys - oh noes!!!1!

Endurance Man, do you think that it wouldn't be worth treating 50 monkeys cruelly, if it saved the lives of hundreds of people? Or improved the lives of people drastically? AFAIK, alot of aids testing is done on monkeys, as is cancer, because they are so similar to humans.

Endurance Man

daRobot wrote:

Animals before people?

You're an idiot

Judging by your well thought out, constructive post, i would say you are indeed the idiot :cool: .
Try to add to the topic, and not make yourself out to be a complete ass hole .

fade2black

monkeyfudge wrote:

Now don't get me wrong. I like monkeys as much as the next man...

But what alternative to animal testing can you suggest? Should we just give up on developing new drugs and treatments?

And I think you love monkeys a little more than the next man...;)

Endurance Man

Fajitas! wrote:

I'm with Monkeyfudge on this one.

Wierd though. Noone really bothers putting up videos of what they inject rats and mice with, but chickens and monkeys - oh noes!!!1!

Endurance Man, do you think that it wouldn't be worth treating 50 monkeys cruelly, if it saved the lives of hundreds of people? Or improved the lives of people drastically? AFAIK, alot of aids testing is done on monkeys, as is cancer, because they are so similar to humans.

Would you say its okay to do testing on animals to try and cure lung cancer patients, even though we have chosen to smoke tobacco and willingly harm our bodys?
So we smoke, with the clear picture that it may very well kill us, so an animal gets tortured? How does that make sense.

monkeyfudge

Not everyone with lung cancer is a smoker.

daRobot

Endurance Man wrote:

Judging by your well thought out, constructive post, i would say you are indeed the idiot :cool: .
Try to add to the topic, and not make yourself out to be a complete ass hole .

Think about this for a second :

You're advocating that medical science stops it's research into treating illness, because you deem it to be cruel to animals.

I find that to be a disgusting attitude to take, and totally unempathetic to people who are seriously sick and in need of a cure ie Hiv sufferers.

Animal testing is necessary.

Fajitas!

monkeyfudge wrote:

Not everyone with lung cancer is a smoker.

Exactly, there's plenty of other causes.

Besides, if one could find a definite cure for lung cancer, surely it could progress to other types of cancer.

Endurance Man

monkeyfudge wrote:

Not everyone with lung cancer is a smoker.

Smoking causes about 90% of lung cancer deaths in men and almost 80% in women. ...

Mimikyu

This post has been deleted.

jimmycrackcorm

fade2black wrote:

Have a read of this and see what you think.

(BTW, notice the ironic Tom Petty tune in the background)

that's a load of crap. - If there are alternatives to animal testing surely they would be more practical to use.

jimmycrackcorm

Solitaryman666 wrote:

This post has been deleted.

Let's distinguish between using animals for testing and unneccasry cruel treatment.

Endurance Man wrote:

Would you say its okay to do testing on animals to try and cure lung cancer patients, even though we have chosen to smoke tobacco and willingly harm our bodys?
So we smoke, with the clear picture that it may very well kill us, so an animal gets tortured? How does that make sense.

I'd say it is ok - and the same above applies. Now tell me about your kid dying of a non-cmoking cancer of which there are many and tell me to forget about using any form of treatment derived from animal testing. Would you?

Mimikyu

This post has been deleted.

Fajitas!

There's some terrible points in there.

Such as... “If you have information on human genes, what’s the point of going back to animals?”

Compare having information on genes to having actual genes. What's going to have the most benefit in research?

Or "clinical investigators study people who are already ill or who have died. Animal experimenters want a disposable “research subject”

It's obviously going to be easier to deal with a disposable research subject for a start. Secondly, you have alot more flexibility. If a scientist wants to see how/why something reacts from the very start, they're going to need to introduce whatever to a research subject. I'd rather them giving a monkey a needle filled with Hiv+ material than my uncle.

My eyes hurt from a long weekend, but I could argue more if I wanted...

RuggieBear

Solitaryman666 wrote:

This post has been deleted.

what's an unimportant product tho....?

Fajitas!

Solitaryman666 wrote:

This post has been deleted.

http://www.covance.com

They actually are a pharmaceutical company though.

Fair enough if it was some hair conditioner, then I would have no problem in saying it was wrong.

cormie

daRobot wrote:

Think about this for a second :

You're advocating that medical science stops it's research into treating illness, because you deem it to be cruel to animals.

I find that to be a disgusting attitude to take, and totally unempathetic to people who are seriously sick and in need of a cure ie Hiv sufferers.

Animal testing is necessary.

Why should humans be more important than anything else? Ok, to humans they may be, but to earth they are the worst thing that has happened. The amount of death and destruction humans have caused is sickening in itself.

Have you never seen monkeys in the wild? They have just as much love for eachother as we do. I'm sure this is the same in a lot of animal species.

I've seen plenty of these types of videos and they are disgusting, the video preview thumbnails on the right were enough and I closed the window. It's too late to watch that kind of thing.

RuggieBear

Fajitas! wrote:

http://www.covance.com

They actually are a pharmaceutical company though.

Fair enough if it was some hair conditioner, then I would have no problem in saying it was wrong.

but what if that untested conditioner turns out to be completely toxic or scars or makes your hair fall out ....wouldn't want my mother to try it first...

Endurance Man

daRobot wrote:

Think about this for a second :

You're advocating that medical science stops it's research into treating illness, because you deem it to be cruel to animals.

I find that to be a disgusting attitude to take, and totally unempathetic to people who are seriously sick and in need of a cure ie Hiv sufferers.

Animal testing is necessary.

Diseases/illness play an important role in the way the world works, what do you think would happen if in 100years man has discovered the cure to EVERY disease on this planet . The world population would spin completely out of control. Illness plays an important part in balancing out our population just like it does in the animal kingdom with regard to prey and predator.
The fact that man has *created* many more diseases due to there complete stupidity is mans problem.

fade2black

It's all about survival. Animals use what they have and do what they have to do to survive. Why shouldn't humans?

Mimikyu

This post has been deleted.

mad m

Thalidomide, I think if more testing had been done with this drug then we could of seen a different outcome when given to pregnant women.

Thalidomide had passed safety tests performed on animals, primarily because the proper tests — particularly those involving pregnant animals — had not been done.

Amazingly its still used today to combat leprosy and other sicknesses.

RuggieBear

cormie wrote:

Why should humans be more important than anything else? Ok, to humans they may be, but to earth they are the worst thing that has happened. The amount of death and destruction humans have caused is sickening in itself.

Have you never seen monkeys in the wild? They have just as much love for eachother as we do. I'm sure this is the same in a lot of animal species.

I've seen plenty of these types of videos and they are disgusting, the video preview thumbnails on the right were enough and I closed the window. It's too late to watch that kind of thing.

so your mother is mortally ill....and the only way to cure her is an animal derived drug...but the animal has to die to save her. what you do? watch your mother die?

Endurance Man

RuggieBear wrote:

what's an unimportant product tho....?

Please take a look at the list i posted a link to - Colgate, Clairol, Max factor, playtex!!

Guy:Incognito

Braun are on the "do test" list. Personnally I see no problems with testing foil razors on monekys. How else will we get that smooth "baby's bottom" skin?

Solitaryman666 wrote:

This post has been deleted.

Animals like to look their best on a night out too.

Endurance Man wrote:

playtex!!

As long as the male animals are'nt degraded by being made to wear the bras aswell , I can't see the problem.

Fajitas!

RuggieBear wrote:

but what if that untested conditioner turns out to be completely toxic or scars or makes your hair fall out ....wouldn't want my mother to try it first...

Lmao, true true.

I guess tests have to be done then. One way or another.

tj-music.com

daRobot wrote:

Think about this for a second :

You're advocating that medical science stops it's research into treating illness, because you deem it to be cruel to animals.

I find that to be a disgusting attitude to take, and totally unempathetic to people who are seriously sick and in need of a cure ie Hiv sufferers.

Animal testing is necessary.

www.peta.tv - is only one source of information regarding the necessity or non-necessity of animal testing. Another one worth looking at is www.animalsasia.org - once you check those pages and google a bit you may find that plenty of medicines could be indeed made artificially.

It just seems to be cheaper to keep e.g bears in cages on farms for their precious bile.

There is a differnce between medical science and animal cruelty. I am not an expert really (and from what I got your no expert either) but I think what should be on trial here is not necessarily the need to use animals if there is really no other way which is very doubtful as most things that could be used as medicine are provided by nature or were before man destroyed parts of nature, but HOW they are treated and tortured is absolutely disgusting.

"Animals before humans" is not the issue - but people like yourself who obviously never questions the need of using animals are the one who contribute to all sorts of animal cruelty by looking away or not caring.

Call me idiot if you want, I don´t care. I can be as intolerant as you :mad:

Chucky the tree

Endurance Man wrote:

Well i just watched (tried to) a horrible video showing the cruelty that occurs at one of many animal testing labs around the world, i feel sick to my stomach .

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-509032547329539187&q=covance

I had to stop this video half way through, be warned .
Are there any supporters of animal testing now :mad: ?

I take it your a vegetarian yes?

Endurance Man

RuggieBear wrote:

so your mother is mortally ill....and the only way to cure her is an animal derived drug...but the animal has to die to save her. what you do? watch your mother die?

I believe if its your time to go, its your time to go. Are you a religious man ruggie?

Fajitas!

tj-music.com wrote:

"Animals before humans" is not the issue - but people like yourself who obviously never questions the need of using animals are the one who contribute to all sorts of animal cruelty by looking away or not caring.

Call me idiot if you want, I don´t care. I can be as intolerant as you :mad:

Oh no, I do question the need of using animals. But research has to be done. End of.

I wouldn't call you an idiot. But I'd ask you to think about it. There has to be a reason that people are testing on these animals. They wouldn't do it just for sh*ts and giggles. Nor just to be cruel.

RuggieBear

Endurance Man wrote:

I believe if its your time to go, its your time to go. Are you a religious man ruggie?

so you'd watch your mother die instead of aiding her by killing another animal...wow.

Endurance Man wrote:

Are you a religious man ruggie?

nope....i just don't think any issues including animal testing are simply black and white.

i love animals and have had many pets but it hasn't stoped me killing insects when neccessary or poisoning mice and rats when they've gotton into my house.


do you eat farmed meat endurance man....?

Tusky

Just curious what people think on this... Do yea all, generally, rate importance of life based on intelligence ? In that case why dont we test on mentally disabled people ?

Fajitas!

Probably because of genetic mutations that wouldn't allow them to be suitable test subjects.

Blisterman

Here's a solution. Use prisoners on death row and sex offenders for testing, rather than animals.

Fajitas!

Blisterman wrote:

Here's a solution. Use prisoners on death row and sex offenders for testing, rather than animals.

I'm pretty sure giving death row prisoners Playtex goods would go under the cruel and unusual punishment list...

ferdi

monkeyfudge wrote:

But what alternative to animal testing can you suggest? Should we just give up on developing new drugs and treatments?

yes. we are all living too long. its not natural for us all to be living til 75, its not sustainable.

Endurance Man

RuggieBear wrote:

so you'd watch your mother die instead of aiding her by killing another animal...wow.

Under those extremely stressful circumstances i think a person will act out of character, no sane person can truthfully say what they would do in a situation as intense as that.

Endurance Man

Ruggie, as i aksed before, what would happen if in 100years time man had discovered a cure for every known drug? The world would totally consume itself, as it is people are living way past the normal life expectancy. Doctors are now saying that most people could live into there early hundreds the way research is going, this is not normal, and is going to a bad affect on the world as a hole.

steviec

Endurance Man wrote:

Under those extremely stressful circumstances i think a person will act out of character, no sane person can truthfully say what they would do in a situation as intense as that.

So you'd kill one monkey to save your mother(all be it out of the 'animals are more important than people' character), consider that testing(not necessarily killing) on a few dozen monkeys could potentially save hundreds or thousands of people...

RuggieBear

Endurance Man wrote:

Under those extremely stressful circumstances i think a person will act out of character, no sane person can truthfully say what they would do in a situation as intense as that.

so you would kill the animal;)

most people will chose the life of a human over the life of an animal...i'd just extrpolate that to include animal testing

all i'm trying to point out with my stupid examples is that animal testing is not a clearcut evil act nor is it a purely noble neccessary act.

Chucky the tree

Endurance Man wrote:

Ruggie, as i aksed before, what would happen if in 100years time man had discovered a cure for every known drug? The world would totally consume itself, as it is people are living way past the normal life expectancy. Doctors are now saying that most people could live into there early hundreds the way research is going, this is not normal, and is going to a bad affect on the world as a hole.

thats why we have wars and murderers.


I also noticed you have yet asked if you eat meat?

steviec

Endurance Man wrote:

Ruggie, as i aksed before, what would happen if in 100years time man had discovered a cure for every known drug? The world would totally consume itself, as it is people are living way past the normal life expectancy. Doctors are now saying that most people could live into there early hundreds the way research is going, this is not normal, and is going to a bad affect on the world as a hole.

Life expectancy has been increasing for 100s of years, in the middle ages people would have said the same thing about people living into their 70s. Why would the world suddenly implode when we go over the 100 mark?

Think about it, as long as elderly people aren't having babies, its not going to lead to a massive population boom. Obviously there are some issues with a large percentage of population unable to work, but if people are healthy enough to live into their hundreds they'd probably be able to work into their 80s or 90s.

Endurance Man

Chucky the tree wrote:

thats why we have wars and murderers.


I also noticed you have yet asked if you eat meat?

I do eat meat, i think we where given a full set of teeth for that reason .

RuggieBear

Endurance Man wrote:

I do eat meat, i think we where given a full set of teeth for that reason .

alot more animal cruelty in farming....